A quote from Aaron's book: " many contempory anarchists tend to hold social relations as pre-eminent- as if they were distinct from ideas, daily life and work" This is one of the strangest claims I've ever come across about anarchism. I've never seen an anarchist do this- and how could they!? New social relations would necessarily include new ideas, form of daily life and work!
This guy got this from a documentary a few years old now. Its called The Third Industrial Revolution: A Radical New Sharing Economy. I watched it a few times, and the guy hits the nail right on the head.
The word "communism" has been dragged through the mud by poorly planned and corrupt implementations, and propaganda, so it is brave to make this argument with these words. That said, I've expericenced emergent communist societies and economies when playing multiplayer games (again, brave but honest wording, maybe you'd want to say "economic simulation" to get the boomer's ears to prick up) with my friends, so I know it can work, and it just seems to happen naturally when there is trust among the populace. I think the main challenge to wide-spread communism (or whatever we end up needing to call it) is to manage bad actors and to patch vulnerabilities.
I'd rather live in the "Culture" series; especially if you see Discovery/Picard as canon. In Picard, they show a black woman who lives in a run down Shack (on Earth), and she bitches at Picard as Picard has a fine chataeu, with luxury furniture. Of course this is just the shows terrible writing and an adolescent attempt to appear "current"; but the point of "FALC" is that the society is post-scarcity to an extent where everyone can have luxury furniture. If you can replicate objects out of nowhere, why is this black woman poor? In Star Trek you still have spaceships even the Enterprise D, where you have to share rooms. Aboard a culture ship you even get a tropical island to visit above decks. Most people live on orbitals so there is no overcrowding, nobody has to work, and people can pretty much do what they want with their lives. I mean who wouldn't want to live in a place like that?? would you rather live on present day Earth? It's just sad it'll be another few hundred years before we get anything like Star Trek, let alone the Culture... We would need much, much better AI in order to get our robots to produce all of our goods, let alone set up a new fair economic system. We'd need beyond a Strong AI, and then you run into problems if it decides to kill everyone. At the moment our AI is so bad, we can't even produce a robot vacuum that can handle cables properly
The second law of thermodynamics may be empty denial of perpetually changeable energy without gain or loss. Our understanding of thermodynamics had a distinct begining with Sir Isaac Newton's correct professional scientific observation that the heat of a fire in a fireplace always flows towards the cold room beyond. Heat never flows spontaneously from cold to hot. Victorian England became enchanted with steam engines and their cheap, reliable, and easy to position physical power. Scientists of the era with wide cultural support formulated the second law of thermodynamics using evidence from steam engine development. The law's formulaters considered with acceptance [A+] Inefficiently harnessing the flow of heat from hot to cold or [B+] Using force to Inefficiently pump heat from cold to hot. They considered with rejection [A-] Waiting for random fluctuation to cause a large difference in temperature or pressure. This was calculated to be extremely rare or [B-] Searching for and selecting for use, random, frequent and small differences in temperature or pressure. The search and selection would require more energy than the use would yield. These accepted options, lead to the consequence that the universe will end in stagnant heat death. This became support for a theological trend of the time that placed God as the initiator of a degenerating universe. Please consider that God could also be supreme over an energy abundant civilization that can absorb heat and convert it into electricity without energy gain or loss in a sustained universe. The law's formulaters did not consider the option that any random, usually small, fluctuation of heat or pressure could use the energy of these fluctuations itself to deterministically select differental treatment so the output is no longer random. Then the net power of many small fluctuations from many replicant parts can be aggregated into a large difference in temperature, pressure, or electricity's amperes and volts Heat exists as the randomly directed kinetic energy of gas molecules or mobile electrons. In gasses this is known as Brownian motion, in electronic systems this is carefully labeled Johnson Nyquist thermal electrical noise. Hypothetically, diode depletion regions are practical sites for enabling mobile electrons energized into motion by thermal electrical noise to deterministically alter the electrical resistance of the depletion region according to the moment by moment direction they are carrying electricity. The thermal electrical noise is hypothetically beyond the exposed lattice charge / diffusion equlibrium thickness of the depletion region. Consistantly oriented diodes in parallel hypothetically are successful electrical Maxwell's Demons or Smoluchowski's Trapdoors. The energy needed to shift the depletion region's deterministic role is paid as a burden on the moving electrons. There would therefore be usable net rectified power from each and every diode connected together into a consistantly oriented parallel group. The group would aggregate the net power of its members. Any diode efficiency at all produces some energy conversion from ambient heat, more efficiency yields higher performance. A diode array that is switched off has no energy conversion and no performance. The power from a single diode is poorly expressed. Several or more diodes in parallel are needed to overcome the effect of a load resistor's own thermal noise. A plurality of billions of high frequency capable diodes is needed for practical power aggregation. For reference, there are a hundread billion1000 square nanometer cells per square centimeter. Modern nanofabrication can make simple identical diodes surrounded by insulation smaller than this in a slab as thick as the diodes are long. The diodes are connected at their two ends to two conductive layers. Zero to ~2 THz is the maximum thermal electrical noise frequency bandwidth available in nature. This is beyond the range of most diodes. Practicality requires this extreme bandwidth. The diodes are preferably in same orientation parallel at the primary level. Many primary level groups of diodes should be in series for practical voltage. Ever since the supposedly universal second law of thermodynamics was formulated, education has mass produced and spread the conventional wisdom throughout society that the second law of thermodynamics is fundamental. If counterexamples invalidated the second law of thermodynamics civilization would learn it could have perpetually convertable conserved energy which is the form of free energy where energy is borrowed from the massive heat reservoir of our sun warmed planet and converted into electricity anywhere, anytime with slight variations. Electricity produces heat when used by electric heaters, motors, or ligts so the energy borrowed by these devices is promply returned without gain or loss. There is also the reverse effect where refrigeration produces electricity equivalent to the cooling, This effect is scientifically elegant. Cell phones wouldn't die or need power cords or batteries or become hot. They would cool when transmitting radio signal power. The phones could also be data relays and there could also be data relays without phone features with and without long haul links so the telecommunication network would be very good and adaptible. Computers and integrated circuits would have their cooling and electrical needs supplied autonomously and simultaniously. Integrated circuits wouldn't need power pinouts. Robots would have extreme mobility. Frozen food storage would be reliable and free or value positive. That means storehouses, homes, and markets would have independent power to preserve and pŕepare food. Vehicles wouldn't need fuel or fueling stops. Elevators would be very reliable with independent power. Decentralized shielded power would be EMP resistant.Water and sewage pumps could be installed anywhere along their pipes. Nomads could raise their material supports item by item carefully and groups of people could modify their settlements with great technical flexibility. Many devices would be very quiet, which is good for coexisting with nature and does not disturb people. Zone refining would involve little net power. Reducing Bauxite to Aluminum, Rutile to Titanium, and Magnetite to Iron, would have a net cooling effect. With enough clean cheap power, minerals could be finely pulverized, and H2O, CO2, and other substance levels in the biosphere could be modified. There should be a unitary agency to look after our global planetary concerns. This is a material revolution with spiritual ramifications. Everyone should contribute individual talents and fruits of different experiances and cultures to advancing a cooperative, diverse, harmonious and unified civilization. It is possible to apply technlology wrong but social force should oppose this. Inventive concepts that are widely published become unpatentabe. A public incorruptable archive could secure attrbution for the original works of creators. Uncorrupted copies would be releaseed on request. No further action would be taken by this institution. Many financially and procedurally independent teams that pool developmental knowlege, and may be funded by many separate noncontrolling crowd sourced grants should convene themselves to develop proof-of-concept and initial-recipe-exploring prototypes to develop devices which coproduce the release of electrical energy and an equivalent absorbtion of stagnant ambient thermal energy. Diode arrays are not the only possible device of this sort. They are the easiest to explain here. These devices would probably become segmented commodities sold with minimal margin over supply cost. They would be manufactured by AI that does not need financial incentive. Applicable best practices would be adopted. Business details would be open public knowledge. Associated people should move as negotiated and freely and honestly talk. There is no need of wealth extracting top commanders. We do not need often token philanthropy from the wealthy if people simply can be more generous if consumer commodities are inexpensive. Industry, government, commercial science, academia, finance, and the military are not configured to develop this easily. There may be "Murder on the Orient Express" style suppression of perpetually convertable conserved energy. Aloha Charles M Brown lll Kilauea, Kauai, Hawaii 96754 1 808 651
The only problem with this is: We have been automating work for about 300 years & we have never once created less jobs..... Every time an innovation has put people out of work, it in turn created multitudes more jobs than it deleted.
Like Telemarketing? This isn’t the flex you think it is. The point here is that menial jobs that aren’t necessary are created to keep the status quo instead of using it for a technological disruption to promote societal advancement.
@@Persian_Rug_Merchant No idea. I was never a huge fan to be fair. Someone somewhere else once explained it with toilet paper. "If you go backpacking in a country with less together supply-chains than the West, then you need to carry your own toilet paper with you. In the West you can pretty much rely on it being there - if your place needs it you buy some more, if you're anywhere else you can pretty much rely on someone else doing the same thing... from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs. Nobody keeps the score on how many sheets are being used by who". So as far as I can gather, Star Trek is like that - but with everything... but it's a military context, so it's still massively hierarchical, and human self-expression has been reduced to something like zero. Androidal. Personally I think we should be optimising for diversity of self-expression, and that level of hierarchy might be useful in a war situation, but outside that it just creates corruption... so it needs to be democratised or something. Or run by a benevolent AI, which is (somehow) democratically accountable/steerable.
@@nicktaylor5264 optimize for freedom of expression and then people can be as normal or different as they want to be. Also what kind of diversity is most impportant to select for? You to establish a hierarchy of diversities (many different kinds) in order to engineer society how YOU decided would be best. I'm sorry but that seems terribly Orwellian tbh.
@@Persian_Rug_Merchant Your swivel-eyed assumption that there will be a "hierarchy of diversities" which I (personally) will rank in importance is not even a straw man.
Its not communism nor capitalism or feudalism, because its transcends economy entirely. Post scarcity is bassicaly combination of abundant energy from dyson swarms + more resources from asteroids + 99% efficient recycling and ASI that designs all of that.
well there still needs to be some method that exists in order to best allocate resources, even if said resources are plentiful. Human wants are always going to evolve as the technology & standard of living evolve too.
Why would you choose to not host the entire video here when the video player on your website is so incredibly awful? I certainly wont be falling for your scam to get my personal info.
Bastani's 'radical leftist' analysis of capitalism and his proposals for socio-economic change look mainstream and surface-level compared to Peter Josephs systematic analysis and alternative system of a Natural Law Resource-based Economy (NLRBE)
We've only spent 200 years trying to make a scientific approach to economics (necessarily labour based economics) and social relations understood, with the entire point of a critical mass of consciousness, i wonder why it would be becoming mainstream
Nothing about war debts. Nothing about George soros Nothing about the ideological belief in anything labelled science Nothing about state meddling and monopoly creation Nothing about undemocratic entities dictating while suggesting they are for democracy Nothing about the realities of the green agenda and globalism (which really means the west) Mostly rhetoric. Very persuasive rhetoric. But still, rhetoric.
@Bobby Brennan ah I see. It’s been some time since I watched this video, but I do recall him talking about crisis. I’m not sure what link I had in mind as I can’t be bothered to listen to this video again, I’ve watched several presentations by this chap and I get the impression that he is over confident in his beliefs. Regarding soros though, do you know he made billions by crashing the Bank of England? The man is a hero to those who identify as being of the left. Do you know he unashamedly worked for the nazis? (The nazis being socialists) Do you know that much of his wealth is funnelled to foundations that actively seek to undermine the west?
@Bobby Brennan dear Bobby you are naive and seem to have fallen for the usual propaganda. the history of soros and the Bank of England is officially recorded. there are documentaries where soros talks about what he did with the nazis and he said he was not ashamed nor would he apologise. there were many Jews working with nazis. There were regiments (I can’t recall the strength so regiment is a placeholder here) of soldiers who were Jews. sorry to break the illusion, but yes, the nazi were socialist. I came to that conclusion years ago because I discovered that many things I was being told at school were not correct. However there is a great presentation on this by tikhistory I have spent decades interested in politics and such matters. It is not for me to dig through research to present for you; it is for you to do that research rather than simply take on good faith the propaganda from the usual sources. you really should drop the mantra, ‘everything I don’t want to believe is alt right. ‘ it is designed to cloud a thinking mind.
@Bobby Brennan you can’t see past your nose Watch tikhistory he has a 4hour presentation on the nazis. Why would I attempt to tap out snippets here, that no doubt you would disagree with via a bias? I gave you that suggestion, so you’ve lost your bet there already. I suspect that your understanding of nazi being facist is not correct, but again, telling you that you have been misled is like telling a devout Christian that god does not exist: it elicits a tantrum. again, go and watch some informed videos or read some informed books that also provide references. The info is out there, look for it rather that ask me to provide you with it all . their view on human nature? Do you mean the ubermench? The aryrian? The fitness of the disabled and others? well all can be found well before the nazis. Via the Fabian society and the eugenics society. I also suggest you examine the nuance of the meaning of state in socialism . you can google soros and Bank of England and find reasonable articles on how he broke the Bank of England ( and later others btw) you can google and find the interview with soros talking about his experiences with nazis. Although he denies being active in taking property form Jews, he also states that if it wasn’t him, it would’ve been someone else anyway - giving away his sociopathy you refute nothing by accusing me of not providing you with each and every detail. You merely seem like you don’t want to find it.
@@wilforddraper3570 Then that is, by definition, not an economy. Thats a post resource scarce civilization, which by definition isn't communism because it transcends economics itself. The only reason economies exist is to economize scarce resources. If resources aren't scarce, then you dont need an economy.
@@smh9902 Then why focus on whos paying for it. Don't get me wrong I'm not trying to prove your wrong I'm new to communism and still learning what it is, but if you accept a post scarcity society wouldn't their be even more archaic to worry who pays for it? Or am I again misinterpreting your point?. I beleive it has communism in the acronym because it falls under the libertarian communists definition of having abolished property all together.
When your biggest issue is an emotional crisis while eating $15 gelato in an apartment with 10 cats without the help of a man, I’d say capitalism is doing quite well. Additionally that global warming crisis would only rise due to exceeds production and no allocation of scarce resources by machines serving humans that aren’t involved in a free market. WALL-E
There is no global warming crisis and no resources are scarce. You have no idea what you're talking about. Free market is the least efficient system of all in term of resources allocation.
I dont see how power hungry machines replacing labour is any good for the planet and CO2 emissions. And I dont understand how we transition from a capitalist model to a everything is free model. I dont think everything would be free even the company with their machine workforce will at some point need to upgrade those robots, maintain those robots, buy new robots to perform new specialised function, costly breakdown repairs of those robots. So whatever product they are producing would need to generate enough capital to absorb those costs, bare minimum. But then to be honest I dont think we would reach the utopia where EVERYTHING was automated and labour almost irrelevant. More than likely what we would see is labour being automated job losses, those people becoming extremely impoverished not being able to find new work as very little or fewer jobs exist, and then those people would probably die out, not able to feed themselves, shelter themselves etc. All whilst the increased automation of labour give the 1% of the most wealthy capitalists a robot workforce they can exploit without arguments over pay for maximum capital gains. Theres no magic switch that instantly reverts all of society to this new labourless model. So I dont think it works, I see the working class dying of malnourishment, exposure, sickness, even suicide why prolong an existence without meaning, suffering and nothing to look forward to or the shame of not being able to provide for your family or alternatively feeling like a burden etc.
@@Charles-pf7zy Spoken like someone who is practically and logically minded and has more than just nice ideological ideals which are neither possible and are very dangerous. 🤷♂️ When robots replace labour working class people and the most poor and less intelligent or people not educated to university standard, and even those that have not chosen technological fields of university study will be the hardest hit, worst off, and impoverished. Fortunately for me I am an electrical design engineer so I should be fine in this technological utopia. But I am not really thinking exclusively about myself.
@@Charles-pf7zy probably because post scarcity, the clue is in the name, there wont be enough raw materials to make anything. But this video doesnt discuss post scarcity, its discussing the uber efficient mega production robots doing all of the production 24/7, so this is not discussing post scarcity society, its actually discussing the exact opposite. Only labour wont be needed, so normal working class people wont have a job or enough money to buy anything, even if the mega production robots make "things" cheaper by producing a lot more than regular humans could produce you still need a job and money to buy cheap things, although its doubtful the mega production robots would make anything cheaper, its supply and demand, if people cannot afford to buy cheap things then there is really no point in your mega producing robots making as much, the laws of economics still apply. So you'd slow your robot workforce down to "just about" meet the demand, that way you dont tank the price of your products, there other reasons too when it comes to warranties on products, or in the food industry why make so much of food that will just go bad if the demands not there to gobble it up... nothing has ever gotten cheaper, we shipped a lot of industry to exploitative labour in China and prices still rise.
A quote from Aaron's book: " many contempory anarchists tend to hold social relations as pre-eminent- as if they were distinct from ideas, daily life and work" This is one of the strangest claims I've ever come across about anarchism. I've never seen an anarchist do this- and how could they!? New social relations would necessarily include new ideas, form of daily life and work!
i think her referring to his misrepresentation of communization but hes wrong so idk
i'm scouting out books for my leftist reading group. do you think this one's a worthy read?
@@aaronwenger3034 No. You'd be better off reading Post Scarcity Anarchism by Murray Bookchin.
@@AutonomousVoice no no no ew bookchin. Read Paul Mattick
@@vitalstatistixthegaul770 I have found Mattick too difficult to read.
So, he’s visioning a Star Trek and Futurama type utopia...I’m down!
Star Trek has always looked dystopian to me
💪😀🤙 yeah! I'm in!
This guy got this from a documentary a few years old now. Its called The Third Industrial Revolution: A Radical New Sharing Economy. I watched it a few times, and the guy hits the nail right on the head.
@@goyonman9655 what is it about the federation that seems dystopian? It's voluntary membership
@@goyonman9655 Eh? In what way?
But he still hasn’t gotten into his point about luxury communism, sounds more like an intro ... I am interested in hearing more about this tho
That's why there's a book...
Fully automated luxury communism is a world of Star Trek, more or less.
He does! The rest of the episode is linked down below in the description my friend, and there's the book too.
You can find the free pdf of the book online or order a paper copy.
The word "communism" has been dragged through the mud by poorly planned and corrupt implementations, and propaganda, so it is brave to make this argument with these words.
That said, I've expericenced emergent communist societies and economies when playing multiplayer games (again, brave but honest wording, maybe you'd want to say "economic simulation" to get the boomer's ears to prick up) with my friends, so I know it can work, and it just seems to happen naturally when there is trust among the populace.
I think the main challenge to wide-spread communism (or whatever we end up needing to call it) is to manage bad actors and to patch vulnerabilities.
Aaron is bang on
Who is here after the Bari Weiss interview with Marc Andreessen?
FALC is just a 2edgy4me way to say you want to live in the United Federation of Planets
I'd rather live in the "Culture" series; especially if you see Discovery/Picard as canon. In Picard, they show a black woman who lives in a run down Shack (on Earth), and she bitches at Picard as Picard has a fine chataeu, with luxury furniture. Of course this is just the shows terrible writing and an adolescent attempt to appear "current"; but the point of "FALC" is that the society is post-scarcity to an extent where everyone can have luxury furniture. If you can replicate objects out of nowhere, why is this black woman poor?
In Star Trek you still have spaceships even the Enterprise D, where you have to share rooms. Aboard a culture ship you even get a tropical island to visit above decks. Most people live on orbitals so there is no overcrowding, nobody has to work, and people can pretty much do what they want with their lives.
I mean who wouldn't want to live in a place like that?? would you rather live on present day Earth?
It's just sad it'll be another few hundred years before we get anything like Star Trek, let alone the Culture... We would need much, much better AI in order to get our robots to produce all of our goods, let alone set up a new fair economic system. We'd need beyond a Strong AI, and then you run into problems if it decides to kill everyone. At the moment our AI is so bad, we can't even produce a robot vacuum that can handle cables properly
The second law of thermodynamics may be empty denial of
perpetually changeable energy without gain or loss.
Our understanding of thermodynamics had a distinct begining with Sir Isaac Newton's correct professional scientific observation that the heat of a fire in a fireplace always flows towards the cold room beyond. Heat never flows spontaneously from cold to hot.
Victorian England became enchanted with steam engines and their cheap, reliable, and easy to position physical power. Scientists of the era with wide cultural support formulated the second law of thermodynamics using evidence from steam engine development.
The law's formulaters considered with acceptance [A+] Inefficiently harnessing the flow of heat from hot to cold or [B+] Using force to Inefficiently pump heat from cold to hot. They considered with rejection [A-] Waiting for random fluctuation to cause a large difference in temperature or pressure. This was calculated to be extremely rare or [B-] Searching for and selecting for use, random, frequent and small differences in temperature or pressure. The search and selection would require more energy than the use would yield. These accepted options, lead to the consequence that the universe will end in stagnant heat death. This became support for a theological trend of the time that placed God as the initiator of a degenerating universe. Please consider that God could also be supreme over an energy abundant civilization that can absorb heat and convert it into electricity without energy gain or loss in a sustained universe.
The law's formulaters did not consider the option that any random, usually small, fluctuation of heat or pressure could use the energy of these fluctuations itself to deterministically select differental treatment so the output is no longer random. Then the net power of many small fluctuations from many replicant parts can be aggregated into a large difference in temperature, pressure, or electricity's amperes and volts
Heat exists as the randomly directed kinetic energy of gas molecules or mobile electrons. In gasses this is known as Brownian motion, in electronic systems this is carefully labeled Johnson Nyquist thermal electrical noise. Hypothetically, diode depletion regions are practical sites for enabling mobile electrons energized into motion by thermal electrical noise to deterministically alter the electrical resistance of the depletion region according to the moment by moment direction they are carrying electricity. The thermal electrical noise is hypothetically beyond the exposed lattice charge / diffusion equlibrium thickness of the depletion region.
Consistantly oriented diodes in parallel hypothetically are successful electrical Maxwell's Demons or Smoluchowski's Trapdoors. The energy needed to shift the depletion region's deterministic role is paid as a burden on the moving electrons. There would therefore be usable net rectified power from each and every diode connected together into a consistantly oriented parallel group. The group would aggregate the net power of its members. Any diode efficiency at all produces some energy conversion from ambient heat, more efficiency yields higher performance. A diode array that is switched off has no energy conversion and no performance.
The power from a single diode is poorly expressed. Several or more diodes in parallel are needed to overcome the effect of a load resistor's own thermal noise. A plurality of billions of high frequency capable diodes is needed for practical power aggregation. For reference, there are a hundread billion1000 square nanometer cells per square centimeter.
Modern nanofabrication can make simple identical diodes surrounded by insulation smaller than this in a slab as thick as the diodes are long. The diodes are connected at their two ends to two conductive layers.
Zero to ~2 THz is the maximum thermal electrical noise frequency bandwidth available in nature. This is beyond the range of most diodes. Practicality requires this extreme bandwidth. The diodes are preferably in same orientation parallel at the primary level. Many primary level groups of diodes should be in series for practical voltage.
Ever since the supposedly universal second law of thermodynamics was formulated, education has mass produced and spread the conventional wisdom throughout society that the second law of thermodynamics is fundamental.
If counterexamples invalidated the second law of thermodynamics civilization would learn it could have perpetually convertable conserved energy which is the form of free energy where energy is borrowed from the massive heat reservoir of our sun warmed planet and converted into electricity anywhere, anytime with slight variations. Electricity produces heat when used by electric heaters, motors, or ligts so the energy borrowed by these devices is promply returned without gain or loss. There is also the reverse effect where refrigeration produces electricity equivalent to the cooling, This effect is scientifically elegant.
Cell phones wouldn't die or need power cords or batteries or become hot. They would cool when transmitting radio signal power. The phones could also be data relays and there could also be data relays without phone features with and without long haul links so the telecommunication network would be very good and adaptible. Computers and integrated circuits would have their cooling and electrical needs supplied autonomously and simultaniously. Integrated circuits wouldn't need power pinouts. Robots would have extreme mobility.
Frozen food storage would be reliable and free or value positive. That means storehouses, homes, and markets would have independent power to preserve and pŕepare food. Vehicles wouldn't need fuel or fueling stops. Elevators would be very reliable with independent power. Decentralized shielded power would be EMP resistant.Water and sewage pumps could be installed anywhere along their pipes. Nomads could raise their material supports item by item carefully and groups of people could modify their settlements with great technical flexibility. Many devices would be very quiet, which is good for coexisting with nature and does not disturb people.
Zone refining would involve little net power. Reducing Bauxite to Aluminum, Rutile to Titanium, and Magnetite to Iron, would have a net cooling effect. With enough clean cheap power, minerals could be finely pulverized, and H2O, CO2, and other substance levels in the biosphere could be modified. There should be a unitary agency to look after our global planetary concerns.
This is a material revolution with spiritual ramifications. Everyone should contribute individual talents and fruits of different experiances and cultures to advancing a cooperative, diverse, harmonious and unified civilization. It is possible to apply technlology wrong but social force should oppose this.
Inventive concepts that are widely published become unpatentabe. A public incorruptable archive could secure attrbution for the original works of creators. Uncorrupted copies would be releaseed on request. No further action would be taken by this institution.
Many financially and procedurally independent teams that pool developmental knowlege, and may be funded by many separate noncontrolling crowd sourced grants should convene themselves to develop proof-of-concept and initial-recipe-exploring prototypes to develop devices which coproduce the release of electrical energy and an equivalent absorbtion of stagnant ambient thermal energy. Diode arrays are not the only possible device of this sort. They are the easiest to explain here.
These devices would probably become segmented commodities sold with minimal margin over supply cost. They would be manufactured by AI that does not need financial incentive. Applicable best practices would be adopted. Business details would be open public knowledge. Associated people should move as negotiated and freely and honestly talk. There is no need of wealth extracting top commanders. We do not need often token philanthropy from the wealthy if people simply can be more generous if consumer commodities are inexpensive.
Industry, government, commercial science, academia, finance, and the military are not configured to develop this easily. There may be "Murder on the Orient Express" style suppression of perpetually convertable conserved energy.
Aloha
Charles M Brown lll
Kilauea, Kauai, Hawaii 96754
1 808 651
The only problem with this is: We have been automating work for about 300 years & we have never once created less jobs.....
Every time an innovation has put people out of work, it in turn created multitudes more jobs than it deleted.
Like Telemarketing?
This isn’t the flex you think it is. The point here is that menial jobs that aren’t necessary are created to keep the status quo instead of using it for a technological disruption to promote societal advancement.
@@AnthonyChinaski No one creates unnecessary jobs.... no one has that kind of money except government.
@@LucVNO you didn’t read the book
@@AnthonyChinaski I dont need to read commies writings. I wouldnt read childrens authors either.
@@LucVNO what? So you admit you don’t know what you’re talking about? WHAT A FLEX! 🤣
It's all well and good pointing at problem in the current paradigm - but what does Luxury Communist economic stystem actually look like?
Star Trek, but optimised for diversity of self-expression.
@@nicktaylor5264 Wasn't the premise of that tv show something about post scarcity?
@@Persian_Rug_Merchant No idea. I was never a huge fan to be fair.
Someone somewhere else once explained it with toilet paper.
"If you go backpacking in a country with less together supply-chains than the West, then you need to carry your own toilet paper with you. In the West you can pretty much rely on it being there - if your place needs it you buy some more, if you're anywhere else you can pretty much rely on someone else doing the same thing... from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs. Nobody keeps the score on how many sheets are being used by who".
So as far as I can gather, Star Trek is like that - but with everything... but it's a military context, so it's still massively hierarchical, and human self-expression has been reduced to something like zero. Androidal.
Personally I think we should be optimising for diversity of self-expression, and that level of hierarchy might be useful in a war situation, but outside that it just creates corruption... so it needs to be democratised or something. Or run by a benevolent AI, which is (somehow) democratically accountable/steerable.
@@nicktaylor5264 optimize for freedom of expression and then people can be as normal or different as they want to be. Also what kind of diversity is most impportant to select for? You to establish a hierarchy of diversities (many different kinds) in order to engineer society how YOU decided would be best. I'm sorry but that seems terribly Orwellian tbh.
@@Persian_Rug_Merchant
Your swivel-eyed assumption that there will be a "hierarchy of diversities" which I (personally) will rank in importance is not even a straw man.
So less FARC and more FALC
Its not communism nor capitalism or feudalism, because its transcends economy entirely. Post scarcity is bassicaly combination of abundant energy from dyson swarms + more resources from asteroids + 99% efficient recycling and ASI that designs all of that.
well there still needs to be some method that exists in order to best allocate resources, even if said resources are plentiful. Human wants are always going to evolve as the technology & standard of living evolve too.
Why would you choose to not host the entire video here when the video player on your website is so incredibly awful? I certainly wont be falling for your scam to get my personal info.
He is dragging his story on for so long I forgot what the question was . just waiting for so long to get to the point and it's boring
Bastani's 'radical leftist' analysis of capitalism and his proposals for socio-economic change look mainstream and surface-level compared to Peter Josephs systematic analysis and alternative system of a Natural Law Resource-based Economy (NLRBE)
What's wrong with being "mainstream"
Ok…so?
We've only spent 200 years trying to make a scientific approach to economics (necessarily labour based economics) and social relations understood, with the entire point of a critical mass of consciousness, i wonder why it would be becoming mainstream
Nothing about war debts.
Nothing about George soros
Nothing about the ideological belief in anything labelled science
Nothing about state meddling and monopoly creation
Nothing about undemocratic entities dictating while suggesting they are for democracy
Nothing about the realities of the green agenda and globalism (which really means the west)
Mostly rhetoric. Very persuasive rhetoric. But still, rhetoric.
@Bobby Brennan yup
@Bobby Brennan I’m not sure I understand your inference, cough cough George soros?
@Bobby Brennan ah I see. It’s been some time since I watched this video, but I do recall him talking about crisis.
I’m not sure what link I had in mind as I can’t be bothered to listen to this video again, I’ve watched several presentations by this chap and I get the impression that he is over confident in his beliefs.
Regarding soros though, do you know he made billions by crashing the Bank of England?
The man is a hero to those who identify as being of the left.
Do you know he unashamedly worked for the nazis? (The nazis being socialists)
Do you know that much of his wealth is funnelled to foundations that actively seek to undermine the west?
@Bobby Brennan dear Bobby
you are naive and seem to have fallen for the usual propaganda.
the history of soros and the Bank of England is officially recorded.
there are documentaries where soros talks about what he did with the nazis and he said he was not ashamed nor would he apologise.
there were many Jews working with nazis. There were regiments (I can’t recall the strength so regiment is a placeholder here) of soldiers who were Jews.
sorry to break the illusion, but yes, the nazi were socialist.
I came to that conclusion years ago because I discovered that many things I was being told at school were not correct.
However there is a great presentation on this by tikhistory
I have spent decades interested in politics and such matters. It is not for me to dig through research to present for you; it is for you to do that research rather than simply take on good faith the propaganda from the usual sources.
you really should drop the mantra, ‘everything I don’t want to believe is alt right. ‘
it is designed to cloud a thinking mind.
@Bobby Brennan you can’t see past your nose
Watch tikhistory he has a 4hour presentation on the nazis. Why would I attempt to tap out snippets here, that no doubt you would disagree with via a bias? I gave you that suggestion, so you’ve lost your bet there already.
I suspect that your understanding of nazi being facist is not correct, but again, telling you that you have been misled is like telling a devout Christian that god does not exist: it elicits a tantrum.
again, go and watch some informed videos or read some informed books that also provide references. The info is out there, look for it rather that ask me to provide you with it all .
their view on human nature? Do you mean the ubermench? The aryrian? The fitness of the disabled and others?
well all can be found well before the nazis. Via the Fabian society and the eugenics society.
I also suggest you examine the nuance of the meaning of state in socialism .
you can google soros and Bank of England and find reasonable articles on how he broke the Bank of England ( and later others btw)
you can google and find the interview with soros talking about his experiences with nazis. Although he denies being active in taking property form Jews, he also states that if it wasn’t him, it would’ve been someone else anyway - giving away his sociopathy
you refute nothing by accusing me of not providing you with each and every detail. You merely seem like you don’t want to find it.
I have a feeling it'll get hacked by somebody unless you can make it unhackable
Robert Brenner is very good on this
OK but who's going to pay for all of this?
Your mom
In a FALC there is no money because everything is readily available.There's no need to trade therefore no need for currency.
@@wilforddraper3570 Then that is, by definition, not an economy. Thats a post resource scarce civilization, which by definition isn't communism because it transcends economics itself. The only reason economies exist is to economize scarce resources. If resources aren't scarce, then you dont need an economy.
@@wilforddraper3570 You're missing the point. The very concept of "resources" becomes archaic and obsolete once you have post-resource scarcity.
@@smh9902 Then why focus on whos paying for it. Don't get me wrong I'm not trying to prove your wrong I'm new to communism and still learning what it is, but if you accept a post scarcity society wouldn't their be even more archaic to worry who pays for it? Or am I again misinterpreting your point?. I beleive it has communism in the acronym because it falls under the libertarian communists definition of having abolished property all together.
Like... Get to the fully automated luxury communism part😤 goddamn click bait🤦♀️
nothing luxurious about living in a open air microwave transhumanism. With neuroweapons there are no boundaries from the abusers up top.
He reminds me of an evangelist and he is really but him and his people are only filling a vacuum
Lol 😂 what?
@@AnthonyChinaski LoL ❤
How does it feel knowing that your hard work has become an obscure meme?
Hard work is overrated for losers. Being a rich scammer is way better
♦
Delusional
When your biggest issue is an emotional crisis while eating $15 gelato in an apartment with 10 cats without the help of a man, I’d say capitalism is doing quite well. Additionally that global warming crisis would only rise due to exceeds production and no allocation of scarce resources by machines serving humans that aren’t involved in a free market. WALL-E
"how could capitalism be bad as a whole if it is good for you specifically"
There is no global warming crisis and no resources are scarce. You have no idea what you're talking about. Free market is the least efficient system of all in term of resources allocation.
@@The_Revolutionist Ahhh yes. Because State agencies/programs are just so good at sticking to the budget, ensuring minimal waste, etc.
lame & naive
I dont see how power hungry machines replacing labour is any good for the planet and CO2 emissions. And I dont understand how we transition from a capitalist model to a everything is free model. I dont think everything would be free even the company with their machine workforce will at some point need to upgrade those robots, maintain those robots, buy new robots to perform new specialised function, costly breakdown repairs of those robots. So whatever product they are producing would need to generate enough capital to absorb those costs, bare minimum. But then to be honest I dont think we would reach the utopia where EVERYTHING was automated and labour almost irrelevant. More than likely what we would see is labour being automated job losses, those people becoming extremely impoverished not being able to find new work as very little or fewer jobs exist, and then those people would probably die out, not able to feed themselves, shelter themselves etc. All whilst the increased automation of labour give the 1% of the most wealthy capitalists a robot workforce they can exploit without arguments over pay for maximum capital gains. Theres no magic switch that instantly reverts all of society to this new labourless model. So I dont think it works, I see the working class dying of malnourishment, exposure, sickness, even suicide why prolong an existence without meaning, suffering and nothing to look forward to or the shame of not being able to provide for your family or alternatively feeling like a burden etc.
Spoken like someone who has no meaning to life outside of work
@@Charles-pf7zy Spoken like someone who is practically and logically minded and has more than just nice ideological ideals which are neither possible and are very dangerous. 🤷♂️
When robots replace labour working class people and the most poor and less intelligent or people not educated to university standard, and even those that have not chosen technological fields of university study will be the hardest hit, worst off, and impoverished. Fortunately for me I am an electrical design engineer so I should be fine in this technological utopia. But I am not really thinking exclusively about myself.
@@pjdilans1 post scarcity society people will become spiritual and not slave away for material needs
@@Charles-pf7zy probably because post scarcity, the clue is in the name, there wont be enough raw materials to make anything. But this video doesnt discuss post scarcity, its discussing the uber efficient mega production robots doing all of the production 24/7, so this is not discussing post scarcity society, its actually discussing the exact opposite. Only labour wont be needed, so normal working class people wont have a job or enough money to buy anything, even if the mega production robots make "things" cheaper by producing a lot more than regular humans could produce you still need a job and money to buy cheap things, although its doubtful the mega production robots would make anything cheaper, its supply and demand, if people cannot afford to buy cheap things then there is really no point in your mega producing robots making as much, the laws of economics still apply. So you'd slow your robot workforce down to "just about" meet the demand, that way you dont tank the price of your products, there other reasons too when it comes to warranties on products, or in the food industry why make so much of food that will just go bad if the demands not there to gobble it up... nothing has ever gotten cheaper, we shipped a lot of industry to exploitative labour in China and prices still rise.
@@pjdilans1 Sounds like you're waiting for UBI
It's the ccp's dream to be honest, but from how it looks right now, not the right path for it at all